I'm not much of a believer in conspiracy theories. I do, however, believe that big business will take a position to protect their near-term profits at the long-term expense of the public. In the US, this is particularly true if the industry is big enough to buy influence (lobbyists, PR firms, lawyers, large media campaigns --note that all of these are now everyday tools of the trade for pharm.) It doesn't take much looking to dig up past and present examples: Oil vs. Climate, Big Sugar vs. diabetes, Opioids, Tobacco.
>countries that foot the bill for public healthcare.
If you want a company to get control of its costs, make the CEO sign all the checks. I'm applying that to a country, but I suspect it works much the same. Eventually, the Budget Office or the Exchequer starts to howl. Study upon study are commissioned, and -after much can-kicking- grants and research funding get brought a little more forward. No matter which country, there is, of course, a demand to ease the burden of those currently suffering and that plays heavily on where the research money goes.
I still believe that even in the US such a conspiracy, if it did gain a foothold, is subject to international cut-throat capitalism and media exposure (particularly the internet). I'll leave collusion and price-setting for addressing at another time as I don't think it happens that often anymore, but it does happen. But I'm still hopeful that we're better able to ferret out and/or guard against Big Whatever Industry locking us into their products and services now vs. 1980s.
...Except I've personally known a director of a major national foundation with a mission statement to seek a cure for a major public health issue. That director eventually quit as the medical device companies moved in and eventually shifted the mission to care.
